 |
| |
|
 |
 |
BCS 'changes' don't amount to much Posted: Wednesday June 26, 2002 12:57 PM
Lesson to be taken from the changes in the BCS formula announced Tuesday: Bureaucracies are not nimble, except when evading responsibility. The major-conference commissioners are the guys who pile into this Yugo of a postseason format. The Big East's Mike Tranghese, now in the driver's seat, said that the group decided not to make wholesale changes in its ranking system. It barely made retail changes, eliminating the margin of victory from the computer formulas and reducing the number of opponents considered to be "quality wins" from the top 15 to the top 10. Oh, and a team has to win nine games this season to be considered for a BCS berth. That's it. Readers of this cyberspace know that I have been begging the commissioners to name a selection committee, similar to the NCAA basketball committee that selects and seeds the 65-team field during March Madness. It would provide the human element that the BCS formula showed it lacked last season, when slumping Nebraska went to the Rose Bowl instead of conference champions Oregon or Colorado. Tranghese said that the commissioners considered the formation of an "oversight committee." However, they couldn't agree upon what the committee would actually do; they could only agree upon what no one wanted to do -- namely, place the pressure of naming the national championship teams on the shoulders of such a small number of people. To analyze this decision in golf terms, the commissioners stepped up to the tee and whacked it. Too bad it was the ladies' tee. I understand the pressure. In fact, I backed away from it. During the 1998 Final Four, several Associated Press voters, including yours truly, told the commissioners we would resign as voters if the BCS used the AP poll as the official arbiter of which teams would play for No. 1. We didn't want the responsibility of awarding $12 million bowl berths. There is a distinction. The AP poll exists to sell newspapers. It names a national champion, yes, but it has always been an unofficial No. 1. It was our right not to vote, and the commissioners decided to build the system we have today. The commissioners and athletic directors built it. They are in charge of it. They constructed something no one can understand because, as it turns out, they don't want the responsibility of deciding which schools should play for the national championship. Yes, it's a tough decision. It may even be tougher than picking teams for the basketball tournament. It must be because the candidates for that duty are lined up from here to the Great Alaska Shootout. But is it a tougher decision than firing a coach? Hiring a coach? Making a TV deal? Cutting a men's team in order to comply with Title IX? Commissioners and athletic directors make pressure-filled choices seven days every week. A berth on an oversight committee that rights the obvious wrongs the BCS formula seems to spit out annually would be just as much of a plum assignment as the basketball selection committee. For that matter, forget the oversight. Ditch the BCS formula and name a football selection committee. Every fall, the BCS formula becomes a greater embarrassment to college football. Every summer, the commissioners announce changes to rectify last year's problems but fail to predict those that lie ahead. This is not a call for a playoff. The BCS is with us for four more years. Get used to it. But the commissioners had the opportunity to regain some credibility for their sport by bringing some sanity to the postseason. They failed to do so. Sports Illustrated senior writer Ivan Maisel covers college football for the magazine and is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
